Sort out FACT from FICTION - Newport Pagnell

[Colin Rowledge]

Just prior to Christmas, I received a package of copied BMD's from a Cousin and these have made interesting reading and have helped me to take my mind of my Father who is 1 month shy of his 92nd birthday and has been in hospital since Dec. 27 with Pneumonia.

One certificate was the death cert. for a 1st cousin 3x removed. He was born in 1870 and died July 9 1929. He married in 1901 and by the time of the 1911 census he and his wife had 6 children - all alive in 1911.

Here is where my investigation has taken me - not as yet confirmed by certificates - but before I spend the loot on them, I'd like to get an opinion on the following as a possible scenario:

1] His bride was born in 1879. Detail on FreeBMD

2] Her mother [Rebecca] married her father [William] in 1875. Detail on free BMD

3] Her mother [Rebecca] was born in 1849. Detail on free BMD. If that birth cert. confirms her parents as Henry and Elizabeth, then she is a product of Henry's 2nd marriage

I have found her [Rebecca] on census records for 1851, 1861 and 1871 living with Henry and Elizabeth along with siblings. In the 1871 census, Henry's occupation is a Gardener and his age is stated as 84.

After Rebecca married in 1875, I then found Henry and Elizabeth in 1881. They are still living in Newport Pagnell where he's lived all his life. His age is stated as 97 and no occupation, but formerly a Gardener.

I found on freeBMD a death for Henry in the last quarter of 1892 with an estimated age of 99. Yhis would make Henry's birth in about 1783. Henry's last child [John] was born in 1854 which if all else is correct, Henry was aged in his early 70's at that time.

Iam aware that in the later years of the 20th century men were able to father children when well into their Golden Years, but is there evidence of this in the 1850's?

What I need to determine is if the 6 children born between 1841 and 1854. when Henry was aged between 58and 71 are actually ALL his natural offspring or if some were Grandchildren that he and Elizabeth were raising.

I am aware of at least 2 children [both boys] who were from his 1st marriage

Colin

[Pam Downes]

Hi Colin,
If you used the calculator Santa bought you for Christmas than I suggest you tell him that it needs new batteries because this is wrong.

I found on freeBMD a death for Henry in the last quarter of 1892 with an estimated age of 99. This would make Henry's birth in about 1783. Henry's last child [John] was born in 1854 which if all else is correct, Henry was aged in his early 70's at that time.

However as your previous paragraph referred to the 1881 census I presume you mean you've found a death for in Dec 1882.

Given the ages of the people in 1871 and 1881 I won't say it's totally impossible for anyone to work out some of the surnames but why you can't just say the surnames I don't know. Ditto all the census references you've found. Especially the 1851 census so we can see for ourselves exactly what's written for the relationships.
We also have no idea of Elizabeth's age which is probably slightly more pertinent to the possibilty of the children being Henry's offspring than Henry's age.
Pam

[Colin Rowledge]

Hi Colin,
If you used the calculator Santa bought you for Christmas than I suggest you tell him that it needs new batteries because this is wrong.

However as your previous paragraph referred to the 1881 census I presume you mean you've found a death for in Dec 1882..
Pam

Yes Pam, you're correct. Typo error on my part Year of death was 1882.

[Pam Downes]

Given Elizabeth's age in 1851, then yes, the children probably are Henry's.
The LDS have filmed the PRs for Newport Pagnell, so why not order in the film in the hope that the children were baptised. Bonus entries might be the baptisms of his earlier children, plus his two marriages. And even Henry's own baptism. Much cheaper than sending for a load of birth certificates.
Pam

[Kerrywood]

It might also be worth looking at FamilySearch.

[Colin Rowledge]

It might also be worth looking at FamilySearch.

Thanks Kerrywood and Pam.

Given my opening paragraph, which at this moment, precludes me from visiting a local LDS, I think FamilySearch might be the most viable option at this stage

Colin

[Colin Rowledge]

My original intent with this post was to obtain an opinion as to whether or not Henry [in his Golden years] was the biological father of Rebecca.

Pam has indicated that such a situation is quite possible.

The couple in this scenario are Henry Barker and his 2nd wife - Elizabeth formerly Walters. As I mentioned earlier, they married in what I think is the latter part of the 1st quarter of 1839. I had the the death of his 1st wife - formerly Holden - registered in what I think is the early pat of the 2nd quarter of the same year. This could well be a 'late-registered' death.

I have the couple from 1841 through to Henry's death in 1882 on census records, along with various children born between 1840-41and 1854.

Their 1st child was Emily who married an Alfred Warwick in Dec. q. 1858. Emily and Alfred had 2 children - Walter Thomas born 1859 and Emily born 1861. Alfred Warwick died in 1869. The 2 kiddies were located in 1871 in the 1871 census - both with Grandparents - Walter with his dad's and Emily with her mum's.

That explains why Emily Warwick shows on both the 1871 and 1881 census with her Grandparents and is properly enumerated as such.

I think that Henry was a very lucky man to live to the age he was recorded.

Cheers